Rebuttal of Statements On 9-23-26
Rebuttal to Statements Mr. Day Made at the Open Board Meeting
September 23, 2026
To Our Friends and Neighbors at Sun Lakes Country Club:
At the recent open board meeting, Mr. Don Day made several statements concerning the current recall effort, the residents involved, and decisions made by the Board. We respect Mr. Day’s right to express his views and recognize that members may have different opinions about the recall. However, several of his statements deserve clarification.
This issue should not be about personalities or labels. It should be about facts, transparency, accountability, and the right of Sun Lakes’ members to participate in the governance of their community.
Mr. Day characterized recall supporters as a “radical small group” attempting to “take control” of the community and accused them of distributing incorrect and unsubstantiated information. These characterizations shift attention from the substantive issues that caused residents to become concerned. Examine the credentials of those involved in the SLCC Voice and Sun Lakers for Accountability and see if “radical” or “take control” remotely apply. Hyperbole perhaps?
Asking questions, requesting information, challenging decisions, and using procedures available to the membership are legitimate forms of participation in association governance.
The Issue Is Not Whether the Board Can Make Decisions
Mr. Day stated that the decision to contract with Morrison/CCL to manage food and beverage operations was approved by the entire Board and that consideration of alternative management was subsequently approved by a majority. Those facts do not resolve the concerns being raised.
The relevant questions are how the decision was reached, what information and alternatives were considered, what information was provided to all members, and whether the process reflected the transparency and accountability our community should expect. This also raises the question of the due diligence performed by individual Board members.
Questions and Disagreement Are Not “Toxic”
Mr. Day suggested that questioning these decisions has been “toxic” to the community and created unnecessary dissension and anxiety. We agree that Sun Lakes should remain a civil and respectful community. But civility cannot mean residents should remain silent when they have legitimate concerns about governance.
Community harmony is important, but so are transparency, accountability, open discussion, and the willingness of elected representatives to answer difficult questions. Asking Board members to explain or defend their decisions should not automatically be characterized as an attack. Mr. Day should reflect his role in creating a “toxic” environment.
The Recall Process Exists for a Reason
Mr. Day asks residents to reject the recall and allow the Board to “do their job.” California law expressly recognizes members' rights to communicate, petition, campaign, and participate in association recall processes. Members may disagree about whether this particular recall is warranted, but participation in the recall process itself is a recognized part of association governance.
Every member should reach his or her own conclusion based on the underlying facts—not characterizations of the residents who initiated the recall. A recall is an established governance mechanism available to the membership. Using it does not demonstrate hostility toward Sun Lakes or the community. It means members are exercising a right available to them when they believe Board accountability warrants consideration.
Whether those concerns justify a recall is a decision for the membership.
Members Deserve the Complete Record
Mr. Day states that the “group” has been skillful in “publishing emails, Facebook posts, and flyers as they share incorrect, opinionated, and unsubstantiated facts.”
Yet he did not identify a specific instance of a misrepresented or false claim. Rather than asking residents to accept either side’s characterization, we encourage members to examine the documents, Board minutes, financial information, correspondence, and chronology of events.
When our statements are challenged, we are prepared to support them. The same standard should apply to statements made in opposition to the recall.
This Is About Governance, Not Neighbors versus Neighbors
Sun Lakes is home to people with different experiences, opinions, and expectations of their elected Board. Those differences do not make one group good residents and another group of trouble makers. We can disagree strongly about Board decisions while continuing to respect one another as neighbors.
We encourage every member to look beyond labels such as “radical” and “toxic” or suggestions that fellow residents are attempting to “take control.” Instead, examine the decisions at issue, the chronology, the available documentation, and the responses—or lack of responses—to members’ questions.
Then reach your own conclusion.
Our community will be better served by an informed membership examining the facts than by questioning the motives or character of neighbors with whom we disagree.
Respectfully,
Sun Lakers for Accountability
